ReviewPediatric radiology2025
Collaborating with non-radiological clinical colleagues.
Review in Pediatric radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Foreign body-induced knee synovitis: importance of history by the radiologist.Pediatric radiology · 2025Article
- Mini-symposium "Daily routine challenges for young paediatric radiologists".Pediatric radiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Paediatric radiology is a challenging and intriguing subspecialty, dealing with children, guardians and non-radiological clinical colleagues. Paediatric radiologists are routinely in contact with numerous paediatric and surgical subspecialties, all having different needs, perceptions, prioritisations and expectations. Moreover, the radiologist is part of the team of radiographers, sonographers, nurses and secretaries, assisted by appropriate equipment and electronic tools. The framework of good collaboration to ensure safety and effectiveness for the imaged child is a shared responsibility among all medical practitioners involved. Communication in routine practice has many forms and includes appropriately filled radiology requests in accordance to the patient's medical records, routine and timely production of structured, problem-solving radiology reports, face-to-face or electronic-assisted communications and discussions on a pre-defined framework, mutually-agreed and evidence-based protocols adjusted to local availability, skills and national and international guidelines. Mutual understanding of advantages and limitations of imaging is paramount. Well-meant discussions, professionalism and empathy should promote soft skills, bidirectional communication and good collaboration for the benefit of added-value paediatric radiology. International societies, health authorities, medical directors and senior consultants have the responsibility to suggest and safeguard frameworks and recommendations. Regular multidisciplinary meetings and multidisciplinary research projects under openness, honesty and transparency are pathways favouring good collaboration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39168913What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.